On 03/25/2014 08:57 PM, Oder Chiou wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie at kernel.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 12:58 AM
>> To: Stephen Warren
>> Cc: Oder Chiou; Bard Liao; alsa-devel at alsa-project.org; lgirdwood at gmail.com;
>> Flove
>> Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: add RT5639 CODEC driver
>>>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:33:42AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 03/25/2014 07:30 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>>>> Looking at the level of code similiarity between this and the rt5640
>>>> driver I can't help but think that these should be supported from a
>>>> single driver - a few quick spot checks of the register map suggests
>>>> that there's at least some overlap. There will need to be some
>>>> device specific handling but it looks like there's more shared than not shared.
>>>> What are the issues that prevent the code being shared, there may be
>>>> something I've missed?
>>>>> FWIW, I was informed internally (although this certainly isn't
>>> normative) that RT5639 is RT5640 plus a DSP, and otherwise compatible.
>>> Related, I have a board that has a RT5639 and I'm running the RT5640
>>> driver on it for at least a simple use-case, without issue.
>> The RT5639 is a simplified version of RT5640. There was only a pair of DACs and there was no MONO out.
> The RT5639 and RT5640 didn't have the DSP function, and the RT5642 was the RT5640 plus a DSP.
> In our side, the Tegra4 was broken, and it also was EOL in your company.
> So, do you have the code base of Tegra5 which can use for verifying the upsteam driver?
Don't you still have the Dalmore (Tegra114/Tegra4) board that you used
last time? While our internal/downstream SW stack deprecates chip SW at
a rather annoying pace, upstream Linux still supports everything all the
way back to Tegra2/Tegra20, including Dalmore specifically. That has RT5640.